|
|
Post by Shezlick on Jul 12, 2005 10:18:12 GMT -5
Dear EQ fans and so forth:
I have always considered myself to be a patient man. But lately this patience has been tested greatly. For over a year I have been surfing the net for some kind of hope that I can catch a glimpse of my most personally hyped up film ever: Ultraviolet. At first I thought it would be release late 2004 then early 2005 and it is supposed to be out in a mere month in the US (I'm from australia by the way) but then I see some title like ' 2006 relaese' F**K OFF! How long must we wait for a film that could have been finished in post production in no time and I'm sure that isn't the case and tehre might be some f**kers in the film studios screwing Kurt Wimmer's baby just like they did with equilibrium, while in the mean time we get film after film of total cinematic crap and to make it worse films like AEON flux and Underworld 2 which have started production or will soon will give the critics a chance to codemn this film even further as another film to the list of sexy woman kicking ass in science fiction action pic.
I read about the action scene that got leaked and wimmer pleaded with the owners to get rid of the footage. Well if we were given some footage in the first place people wouldn't have to steal it! I mean what is the crime here? Okay I know about copryright and all that but I find it very dissapointing that a film of such potencial can fall into the abyss of movie limbo. GIVE US A TRAILER! An interview! A TEASER! A SOMETHING! Am I going crazy or is it everyone else?
What's that? Does someone argue that this all makes for a better final product. NO! The film is ready. It just needs a push. I am sure that if it was it Wimmer's hands it would be released tomorrow. I mean what are they waiting for? I wounder if some film excecutives are scarred about the money they will loose if they relaese it against a new Hillary Duff or Lydsey Lohan Flik on the Summer boxoffice. You spent f**kng 30 million on the thing so you might as well take another risk and let people see it you greedy bastards! I am so sick of these crappy, self indulgant, short sighted, steretypical slush that is released efery week in the theaters. Okay Ultraviolet is not the shakespear of originality I'm sure but I want to see the underdog have it's day and not the one with more money.
I apoligise for the swearing if it has offended anyone and you have the right to remove this message if it is usuitable for this website and it can dissappear along with a little film that should have been released months ago but all forces were hellbent against it ever seeing the light of day.
PS: Rerelease that stolen action footage...It seems like it's the only Ultraviolet we will get to see for a very long time if not for ever. Wimmer your a legend but the wakowski brothers get all the fame. It sucks but that's how things have worked out. I'm off to watch Equilibrium for the 33rd time.
Seeya.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cleric Van Doom on Jul 12, 2005 20:35:00 GMT -5
I second whatever he said, I too go on this site and imdb everyday hoping to read anything new about UV, but....sigh
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 13, 2005 10:18:54 GMT -5
I'm very sorry about the lack of UV news guys. I just add to the site the stuff I find around the net. I can't create new information but I do have to say that for whatever reason it does not look promising due the lack of info.
|
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jul 13, 2005 12:40:26 GMT -5
It's very disheartening, but I don't lay the blame at your feet at all Jen. We still love ya  |
|
|
|
Post by frivolity on Jul 13, 2005 14:04:54 GMT -5
...but I find it very dissapointing that a film of such potencial can fall into the abyss of movie limbo. GIVE US A TRAILER! An interview! A TEASER! A SOMETHING! Am I going crazy or is it everyone else?... I so empathise with you on this. If only we were told what the reasons are. It is frustrating, the not knowing. I'm going through this on the wait for 'Walk The Line' (the Johhny Cash biopic starring Joaquin Phoenix). we're presuming it's because it's supposed to be good enough for an Oscar. It's been held back from release for a year. We're just hoping it DOES get released in November (USA, we have to wait even longer in the UK*), and still no trailer. They've only just started getting posters out apparently. But it's the frustration in not being told the reasons for not releasing a film. *and that's another point. The world is so small now, and what with the Internet making it even smaller, I can't understand why films aren't released worldwide at the same time. Surely it can't be just because of the premieres? I hope something surfaces soon for both movies. |
|
|
|
Post by shezlick on Jul 13, 2005 21:07:38 GMT -5
I'd just like to say that it is in no way Jen's fault. Your site is fantastic and your doing a better job with this film's news than any other on the website so keep up the good work.
|
|
|
|
Post by shezlick on Jul 13, 2005 21:15:45 GMT -5
If it appeared that I was laying the balme on you I apologise. Thta was never my focus of agression at all.
By the way this is a bit of a digress but does anyone know where I can dowload equilibrium in mpeg fromat? I'm thinking of creating my own preview trailer for it. I managed to get the footage onto my editing software by ripping it from dvd but then the sound wouldn't play and now my DVD is scratched or something and won't go past the libria menu screen with Diggs face in the background. If there is some link or if something I'd like to know about it.
I think it would make for a new section of fan art on the site if others are interested in doing the same thing. Well we will see.... Reply if you can.
|
|
|
|
Post by anna24 on Jul 13, 2005 21:57:09 GMT -5
That is a great idea shezlick! I would love to make my own preview trailer. That sucks that your DVD is scratched. Editing MPEGs can be a pain, but I'm willing to go through it for this  . Check out this topic currently on the forums: equilibrium.proboards17.com/index.cgi?board=EC10&action=display&thread=1121031259Somebody made an EQ trailer to Kill Bill music and sound effects. It is hilarious! frivolity, I too don't understand why movies are not released at the same time worldwide. |
|
|
|
Post by wtf on Jul 13, 2005 22:00:47 GMT -5
When Wimmer was here at UT, there was no indication of wierdness going on in terms of UV getting out. The trailer that he shown us still needed some CGI passes as some rendering was rough, which is why he definately wouldn't want anyone to see it. Joe Q. Public reaction would be "Man, the CGI SUXXORS." He also didn't show any interest in it being PG-13.
So something must have happened between April and now. Who knows what. I suspect studio politics. If he's battling them at the moment, it might be disadventageous for him to make any statement while he is still in combat.
|
|
|
|
Post by wtf on Jul 13, 2005 22:03:10 GMT -5
Oh, and before you think I'm too calm about it. I'd like to say
"YEEARGH! AAAAAUUUUUGH!!!! GRRRRRRRRrrrrrrRRRRR! AUUUUUGH!"
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Witcher Wolf on Jul 14, 2005 6:13:12 GMT -5
That's better Al, let it out *G* |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 14, 2005 10:50:42 GMT -5
Oh, and before you think I'm too calm about it. I'd like to say "YEEARGH! AAAAAUUUUUGH!!!! GRRRRRRRRrrrrrrRRRRR! AUUUUUGH!" Thank you. Diddo that!!! The silence though is something to be somewhat concerned over... |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 14, 2005 10:53:44 GMT -5
He also didn't show any interest in it being PG-13. That must be disheartening for him. I know it would be for me especially since EQ's main theme really is about our current rating system. (EC10=NC17) |
|
|
|
Post by frivolity on Jul 14, 2005 11:20:25 GMT -5
He also didn't show any interest in it being PG-13. That must be disheartening for him. I know it would be for me especially since EQ's main theme really is about our current rating system. (EC10=NC17) Embarassed novice here... could you explain our current rating system please. *friv scratches head wondering if EC = emotional content, does NC stand for Norty content?* |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 15, 2005 5:18:37 GMT -5
That must be disheartening for him. I know it would be for me especially since EQ's main theme really is about our current rating system. (EC10=NC17) Embarassed novice here... could you explain our current rating system please. *friv scratches head wondering if EC = emotional content, does NC stand for Norty content?* It is a bit difficult to explain it since it actually changes from film to film depending on who is doing the reviewing but Wimmer stated the following... I made a movie about this - the banned material, films, music, etc, in EQ is rated EC-10 for emotional content. I thought this was a pretty obvious reference to NC-17 but few if any picked up on it. (especially since Stormtroopers are burning 35mm film while talking about its rating). In any case, the problem with the MPAA in my view, is not that they're basically reviewing material for the public, but that their standards are grossly inconsistent. An R rated film today is the PG-13 film of 1990. Total Recall, in its current form, could never be made today. Have we really changed that much in ten years? Furthermore, their ratings standards vary from studio to studio and movie to movie. Windtalkers for instance, is one of the goriest films in years, but there was no way the MPAA was going to give the first film about Navajo Windtalkers an NC-17 rating. Samurai flick? Maybe even a little less gory? Fuhgeddaboutit. Dimension, the studio I made my film for, is hated by the MPAA and is routinely shafted in ratings of both films and trailers. The problem is that it sets guidelines (for instance, more than one 'fuck' earns an 'R' rating) and then turns the films over to volunteer groups comprised of housewives and other people who have the time to participate in rating films. So, it really depends on which group of people you get in the lottery to rate your film. Then, if you make changes and come back, say, three months later, chances are, it will be a different group of people who will judge the film this time around (according to their own peculiar set of hang-ups). The problem, as I see it, is this - not that someone's there to say that parents should excercise caution when showing something to children - who are delicate, vulnerable and impressionable - but in the fact that they are restricting what ADULTS are allowed to see. And yes, if a film is rated NC-17 you will most likely never see it. You will never see it because the studio who sank its money into it will go back and butcher it into an 'R' rating because newspapers won't advertise an NC-17 film and you won't see it because if the financiers actually have the nads to keep it NC-17 it will get no advertising push and an incredibly limited DVD release. It's about money. But hey, I'm an adult thank you and I don't need you to protect me from the world. But, unfortunately, we live in a world where people are increasingly rejecting responsibility for their own actions (who would we sue if we were responsible for the stupid things we did?) In my opinion, when something is rated 'R' - that should be it, adult material, period. Enter and experience at your own risk. What is the contention? That there's adult material and then there's ADULT material? Sure, we know, it's called porno. But hey, if I go to a Scorcese film I know I run the risk of being exposed to graphic violence but probably no penetration - and I make an educated decision. If I go to a PTAnderson film, maybe the opposite - and I make an educated decision. Last time I checked, that was the DEFINITION of being an adult. If I'm not sure, I can check out a few reviews. But the MPAA has determined that some emotions are just too dangerous for even mature adults to be exposed to and since that pesky bill of rights says that they can't actually stop the release of someone's self-expression, (unless it actually goes so far as to hurt someone's feelings; then they've got a case) they've done the next best thing - NC-17. The end-result, intended or not, is artistic censorship. The official seal of NC-17 is the official seal of doom - meaning that we will never, ever, see big-budget explorations into many of the kinds of intensity that we might be interested in seeing. In other words, to put it plainly, you are never, ever, ever, ever, going to see a decent sword-fight at the movies. - Kurt Wimmer (as Ludwig Van), CHUD Message Board www.freewebs.com/equilibrium-movie/chudindex.htm |
|
|
|
Post by Shezlick on Jul 15, 2005 21:37:00 GMT -5
I guess it's also part of how popular you are. Take kill bill which literally has pools of blood in its sword fighting scenes but then again he's tarantino and 'HE'S COOL'. Even though he basically borrows scenes or entire movie plots (Resevoir dogs) from other films that have inspired him it's okay because he's tarantino and 'HE'S COOL'. If people are going to bag ultraviolet for being just eye candy with a paper thin plot or a mindless excuse for glorified violence lets think of Kill Bill: Woman goes on crazy revenge mission and kills everybody in her way. Oh yeah I'm sorry it's Tarantino and 'HE'S COOL'.
Don't get me wrong I love Tarantino (pulp fiction is fantastic) but you have to look at these things objectively. If Total Recall couldn't be made today why are films like Kill Bill around. Recall director Paul Verhoven which has always been known for gut wrenching violence as shown also in robocop and starship troopers and is still displaying his talent for brutal violence on screen. HOLLOW MAN sucked but some of those scenes are still some of the most violent you can come across in a film even though the movie as a whole was a critical let down for me.
So for the most part censorship sucks ass but at the end of the day it also depnds on how much money you can bring to the box office: TARRANTINO = PROFIT.
WIMMER = RISK = FINANCAIL/CRITICAL BACKLASH = POSSIBLE LOSS.
Simple really and I never completed year 12 maths.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cleric Van Doom on Jul 18, 2005 21:44:55 GMT -5
weee, lets keep this topic alive, go UV!
|
|
|
|
Post by TheKaiser on Jul 18, 2005 22:38:55 GMT -5
I agree that its a mistake to shelf the film. I don't think a film has ever succeeded after being shelved. Then again maybe it actually is still in editing post-production.
I'm not too crazy about the plot for UV, so I just want this film over and done with so we can see some new stuff from Wimmer.
|
|
|
|
Post by frivolity on Jul 19, 2005 17:10:11 GMT -5
Thanks for posting that for me JenGe. Apologies for not thanking you sooner.
Huggses, friv. XXX
|
|
|
|
Post by Cleric Dogbert on Jul 29, 2005 0:57:49 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is the FANBOYS!!!
Movie studio announces a project..they send their little lackeys out on the net to see what the fanboys say. If the fanboys are drooling all over themselves at seeing the project on the big screen, then the studio goes ahead. But if the fanboys don't do anything, then the studio wonders if it should release the film (even if it is done).
I think that is part of the prob with UV. The studio isn't getting the fanboy reaction and so isn't sure if they should release or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Jul 29, 2005 1:50:43 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is the FANBOYS!!! I'm not sure if it's due to "fanboys" or test audiences... To quote Kate and Leopold... "You're sucking the life out of American cinema!" |
|
|
|
Post by TheKaiser on Jul 30, 2005 1:28:28 GMT -5
I think part of the problem is the FANBOYS!!! Movie studio announces a project..they send their little lackeys out on the net to see what the fanboys say. If the fanboys are drooling all over themselves at seeing the project on the big screen, then the studio goes ahead. But if the fanboys don't do anything, then the studio wonders if it should release the film (even if it is done). I think that is part of the prob with UV. The studio isn't getting the fanboy reaction and so isn't sure if they should release or not. Well they're not giving fanboys anything to see. Hype it and they will come. |
|
|
|
Post by Walldude on Aug 7, 2005 11:57:10 GMT -5
Costs money to build up hype. Remember what happened with EQ. They had already made their money back with foreign distribution rights and didn't want to sink any money into marketing and turn a money makker into a money pit. Studios suck.
|
|
|
|
Post by TheKaiser on Aug 8, 2005 21:22:15 GMT -5
Costs money to build up hype. Remember what happened with EQ. They had already made their money back with foreign distribution rights and didn't want to sink any money into marketing and turn a money makker into a money pit. Studios suck. Wimmer could do it himself. Look how quickly that UV clip made its way around the web before being removed. If he gets a press kit together and release it, fanboys will do the work. It'll at least generate some internet buzz, which may convince studios that the film deserves the advertising budget needed to create hype. Unless Wimmer's got his hands tied by studios, there's no reason he should start organizing some of the films advertising himself. Get an internet trailer out there! |
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Aug 8, 2005 22:01:40 GMT -5
Wimmer could do it himself...Unless Wimmer's got his hands tied by studios, there's no reason he should start organizing some of the films advertising himself. Get an internet trailer out there! Do you really think that Kurt Wimmer owns the rights or has the clout to do that?? It amazes me how often people think that new directors have the weight and pull like those of Lucas and Spielberg.  Rarely do these newer directors have the rights to their own films let alone the ability to release info...any info. Can you say lawsuit?? I knew you could. I don't know about you but I would think that's the last thing a new director like Wimmer wants on his resume. |
|
|
|
Post by TheKaiser on Aug 9, 2005 20:13:25 GMT -5
Wimmer could do it himself...Unless Wimmer's got his hands tied by studios, there's no reason he should start organizing some of the films advertising himself. Get an internet trailer out there! Do you really think that Kurt Wimmer owns the rights or has the clout to do that?? It amazes me how often people think that new directors have the weight and pull like those of Lucas and Spielberg. Rarely do these newer directors have the rights to their own films let alone the ability to release info...any info. Can you say lawsuit?? I knew you could. I don't know about you but I would think that's the last thing a new director like Wimmer wants on his resume. Hence, "his hands are tied by studios". |
|
|
|
Post by icecool on Aug 12, 2005 2:37:52 GMT -5
Hi,
I would just like to point out that Equilibrium took 2 FULL years before its release (was filmed october-december 2000 and released december 2002) . And in most countries even released a lot later in 2003 and even some in 2004!
|
|
|
|
Post by TheKaiser on Aug 13, 2005 0:27:27 GMT -5
Hi, I would just like to point out that Equilibrium took 2 FULL years before its release (was filmed october-december 2000 and released december 2002) . And in most countries even released a lot later in 2003 and even some in 2004! Yep. But the fact that this is happening to Ultraviolet as well is not a good sign for Wimmer's career. |
|
|
|
Post by ClericRyan on Sept 30, 2005 8:02:43 GMT -5
I think KW should take as long as he has to to put out a really great film, if it take 3 more years, so be it, for the quality of the result
p.s. Jen rules, so does her site, and I secretly am in love with her
|
|
|
|
Post by JenGe on Sept 30, 2005 10:27:42 GMT -5
p.s. Jen rules, so does her site, and I secretly am in love with her  Didn't you propose to me way back when?? It great to see you on the boards Ryan. How've ya been?? |
|
.
